The Good Party v Electoral Commission of South Africa and Others

Three ward councillor vacancies arose in Wards 16, 20 and 27 of the George Local Municipality, triggering by-elections in terms of the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act 197 of 1998. The Electoral Commission published election timetables and opened periods for voter registration, pre‑inspection of the voters’ roll and objections. The Good Party, a registered political party contesting the by‑elections, did not object within the stipulated timetable. Days before the elections, it alleged an unusual increase in voter registrations and later obtained affidavits alleging that Democratic Alliance canvassers encouraged voters from outside Ward 20 to register there. The Good Party requested the Electoral Commission to investigate, objected to the voters’ roll, and demanded a postponement of the by‑elections. The Electoral Commission dismissed the objections as vague, procedurally defective and lacking substance, and refused to postpone the elections. The Good Party then brought an urgent application in the Electoral Court to review and set aside the Commission’s decision and to compel a postponement and investigation.

The application was dismissed in its entirety. No order as to costs was made.

The case underscores the strict enforcement of electoral timetables and procedural requirements in South African electoral law. It affirms that allegations of electoral fraud must be raised timeously and supported by credible evidence, and that courts will not lightly interfere with scheduled elections. The judgment reinforces the principle that urgency in electoral litigation cannot be self‑created and highlights the limited circumstances in which by‑elections may be postponed.